Interrelationships of Functional Status and Health Conditions in Children With Cerebral Palsy: A Descriptive Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the relationship among the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), and the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) in children with cerebral palsy (CP) and to determine the average number and effect of health conditions. METHODS: Participants were 671 children with CP aged 2 to 12 years from Canada and the United States. Cross-tabulation of functional classifications and averages were computed for the number and impact of health conditions and comparisons among groups. RESULTS: A total of 78 of the 125 possible classification combinations were recorded. Most frequent were GMFCS I, MACS I, CFCS I; GMFCS I, MACS II, CFCS I; and GMFCS II, MACS II, CFCS I. With lower levels of function, the average number and average impact of associated health conditions increased. CONCLUSIONS: The use of functional profiles across classification systems, with data on the associated health conditions, provides a more comprehensive picture of CP than any single classification or measure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".